Mitsubishi ASX 2010 vs Nissan Qashqai 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 117 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 154 NM | 156 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.4 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi ASX is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi ASX engine produces 2 HP more power than Nissan Qashqai, but torque is 2 NM less than Nissan Qashqai. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi ASX reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi ASX is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai, which means that by driving the Mitsubishi ASX over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi ASX consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Qashqai. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 65 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 970 km in combined cycle | |
| 1260 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| 910 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Mitsubishi ASX gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 360'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 20 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Nissan Almera, Nissan Juke, Nissan Note, Nissan Micra | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Nissan Qashqai might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Nissan Qashqai 2008 1.6 engine: A simple and reliable engine, not particularly demanding on fuel quality. Tends to consume more oil, may have problems starting in cold weather. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.32 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.61 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mitsubishi ASX is 3 cm shorter than the Nissan Qashqai, 1 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 419 litres | 410 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | no data | 410 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 419 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1219 litres | 1520 litres | |
| The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Nissan Qashqai (by 301 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi ASX is 0.4 metres less than that of the Nissan Qashqai, which means Mitsubishi ASX can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`870 | 2`072 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | high | low | |
| Mitsubishi ASX has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Nissan Qashqai has serious deffects in 155 percent more cases than Mitsubishi ASX, so Mitsubishi ASX quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 6000 | 5200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi ASX has
|
Nissan Qashqai has
| |